Should federal welfare recipients in Missouri face drug tests? More specifically, is it a good use of taxpayer money?

To State Rep. Stacey Newman, the answer is clearly no. Statistics that she shares with Daily RFT -- and which were debated at a hearing last week -- show that while the state has allotted hundreds of thousands of dollars toward drug testing certain welfare recipients in Missouri, the number of positive test results are incredibly low.

"The cost per person is astronomical," Newman, a Democrat, tells us. "Missourians do not agree with this. There are other ways that we can be spending hard-earned tax money."

This drug-testing requirement was established through 2011 legislation signed into law by Governor Jay Nixon, a Democrat. The law says that any applicant or recipient of TANF who tests positive for the use of an illegal controlled substance will, after an administrative hearing, be declared ineligible for the temporary assistance benefits for three years. (If applicants enroll in and complete a substance abuse treatment program -- and stay clean -- they can then begin receiving benefits again).

This is the first year the legislature has appropriated funds for the testing outlined in the new law. And the results show that very few test positive.

Since the tests began this budget cycle through June 30, there were 212 drug referrals from the application and approval process.

Of those, nine tested positive.

There were 67 who tested negative and 86 who did not cooperate, failed to provide a valid test sample or were no shows.

Around 33 chose treatment referrals in lieu of testing. Thirteen refused to answer questions at their hearings.

There is also a Highway Patrol component that is conducted quarterly to check for any misdemeanor or felony drug related arrests or convictions during the previous year. All temporary assistance heads of households are subject to this check. Of 215 with a match, through July of 2013, three were permanently disqualified due to a highway patrol match, the findings show.

"When you do the math, our state is spending atrocious amounts of money," Newman says.

"That number just jumped out of the page at me," she says of the low rate of positive tests. "It's nuts."

Newman points to a report from the Maddow Blog that picks apart similar programs in other states that critics say are clearly wasteful. Missouri's numbers are worse, she argues.

She hopes that lawmakers will take a look at these statistics and consider them in future budget decisions. "Clearly this additional money for drug testing does not need to be appropriated. It's money that we're totally wasting."

These kinds of laws reflect misguided priorities of her Republican colleagues, she argues. "It's an ideology that seems to prevail through the majority party. If you are poor or you need some type of temporary assistance, you must be committing fraud."

We Recommend

Cost is $45 per recipient, only recipients that have cause for narcotics are tested, such as an arrest, and they pay for the test if test is positive. You use marijuana joint photo as representation of a narcotic. The photo alone was enough to tell me this article is media hype. You are a joke.

yes drew I know several people on welfare who brag how they don't have to work but a few hours a week while they sit there and drink a beer or smoke a joint...its pathetic and It makes me sick because I work my ass off, am a single parent I don't drink and I don't do drugs I got no child support from my ex and I have managed to stay off food stamps and welfare

But all these people believe that it is far more important to give all that money to a corporation that is making a huge profit on these drug test. Stupid is as stupid does, and a fool and their money is soon parted. Never have I seen those two saying be more true.

If you are drug tested by your employer, your employer pays the cost. If the state drug tests someone, then you, the taxpayer, pays the cost. If you are willing to spend a million of taxpayer money to save a hundred thousand dollars, you are an idiot.

When a company drug tests you for a job, the companies pays the cost. If the government drug tests you for benefits, the taxpayer foots the bill. In the end, few will be denied based on the test, but much will be spent. Stupid is as stupid does, here's your sign!

They aren't even testing them. I know several people who live in the St. Louis area who do drugs and have never been tested that have collected welfare as their way of living to support themselves for the past 20 years.

They only do random testing anyway... if they test them...they give notice... yes a waste of money.. if you call in on a family they give them 24 to 48 hr unless there is physical abuse, notification they are coming. Any idiot can pass with that much notice

Complete waste of money. If one family member doesn't qualify, another can. Doesn't stop anyoneone from using drugs or getting wellfare. Just look at the numbers in FL... it has cost them more to test everyone than it saved in denying assistance to those that failed.

Yes, it is a good idea. Why should my tax dollars go to their addiction ? We should also figure out a way to make sure they aren't buying liquor too. That money is to feed them and their kids or keep the lights on. Not to use and drink away.

I like the idea of drug testing welfare recipients but is it a waste of tax dollars? Most likely....perhaps if they take the cost of the testing out of the benefits in payments until it's paid off for those that are approved and those who are denied....bill them for the testing